A Precautionary Consensus?

  • Hamilton C
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
4Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This chapter aims to examine the cross-cutting trends, and indeed differences, in counter-terrorism law and policy across the three jurisdictions. In all three we can point to evidence of 'all-risks' policing, mass surveillance, broadly drafted legislation, a growing range of precursor offences and increasing resort to administrative over judicial authorities. Admittedly, this has occurred to varying degrees in the three jurisdictions and according to pre-established legislative patterns, practices and political cultures. There have also been marked differences in the application of these laws, emphasising the need for comparative research to examine the law in practice as well as the law in the books.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hamilton, C. (2019). A Precautionary Consensus? In Contagion, Counter-Terrorism and Criminology (pp. 109–128). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12322-2_5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free